Ophthalmic research · 2025
Indications and Outcomes of Posterior Scleral Contraction and Pars Plana Vitrectomy in Myopic Traction Maculopathy: A Retrospective Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Hantao, Zhang Zichen, Wang Shimeng, Pan Ao, Wei Shuting, Mei Jinghao, Zhu Shuangqian, Huang Fang, Wu Ronghan, Lin Zhong
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to characterize the differential indications and compare anatomical and visual outcomes between pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and posterior scleral contraction (PSC) in eyes with myopic traction maculopathy (MTM).
METHODS: One hundred seventy-five eyes with MTM from 157 patients who were treated with PSC or PPV and had at least 6 months of follow-up were retrospectively analyzed. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was used to assess visual outcomes. Anatomical outcomes were assessed using optical coherence tomography.
RESULTS: The PPV and PSC groups included 87 and 88 eyes, respectively. Eyes in the PPV group were presented with higher presence of epiretinal membrane (93.1% vs. 69.3%, p < 0.001), larger macular hole (MH) diameter (128.0 μm vs. 0 μm, p = 0.01), and more severe pattern of MH (e.g., full thickness MH 18.4% vs. 10.2%, p < 0.001), whereas they achieved better anatomical outcomes (MH recovery rate: 89.9% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.001; incidence of complete or essential recovery: 82.8% vs. 61.4%, p < 0.001; the median time to recovery: 90 days vs. 307 days, p < 0.001). Additionally, better recovery of retinal profile in PPV group tended to be more significant in eyes with axial length (AL) ≤30 mm. Conversely, eyes in the PSC group were presented with more advanced MTM staging system (e.g., stage 4 13.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.003) and larger highest cavity of maculoschisis or macular detachment (389.3 ± 229.8 μm vs. 322.2 ± 216.4 μm, p = 0.048), resulting in significant reduction in AL postoperatively (29.9 ± 1.6 mm before surgery vs. 28.2 ± 1.6 mm at last follow-up, p < 0.001). In multivariate linear regression analysis, type of operation did not have a significant impact on BCVA at last follow-up or on change in BCVA after surgery.
CONCLUSION: PPV was typically performed for eyes with severer vitreoretinal interface abnormalities and achieved better outcomes, particularly in eyes with AL ≤30 mm. PSC was performed for eyes with advanced MTM staging system, providing better axial stabilization despite slower anatomical improvement. Both approaches improved visual acuity to a similar extent, irrespective of the surgical technique employed.
METHODS: One hundred seventy-five eyes with MTM from 157 patients who were treated with PSC or PPV and had at least 6 months of follow-up were retrospectively analyzed. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was used to assess visual outcomes. Anatomical outcomes were assessed using optical coherence tomography.
RESULTS: The PPV and PSC groups included 87 and 88 eyes, respectively. Eyes in the PPV group were presented with higher presence of epiretinal membrane (93.1% vs. 69.3%, p < 0.001), larger macular hole (MH) diameter (128.0 μm vs. 0 μm, p = 0.01), and more severe pattern of MH (e.g., full thickness MH 18.4% vs. 10.2%, p < 0.001), whereas they achieved better anatomical outcomes (MH recovery rate: 89.9% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.001; incidence of complete or essential recovery: 82.8% vs. 61.4%, p < 0.001; the median time to recovery: 90 days vs. 307 days, p < 0.001). Additionally, better recovery of retinal profile in PPV group tended to be more significant in eyes with axial length (AL) ≤30 mm. Conversely, eyes in the PSC group were presented with more advanced MTM staging system (e.g., stage 4 13.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.003) and larger highest cavity of maculoschisis or macular detachment (389.3 ± 229.8 μm vs. 322.2 ± 216.4 μm, p = 0.048), resulting in significant reduction in AL postoperatively (29.9 ± 1.6 mm before surgery vs. 28.2 ± 1.6 mm at last follow-up, p < 0.001). In multivariate linear regression analysis, type of operation did not have a significant impact on BCVA at last follow-up or on change in BCVA after surgery.
CONCLUSION: PPV was typically performed for eyes with severer vitreoretinal interface abnormalities and achieved better outcomes, particularly in eyes with AL ≤30 mm. PSC was performed for eyes with advanced MTM staging system, providing better axial stabilization despite slower anatomical improvement. Both approaches improved visual acuity to a similar extent, irrespective of the surgical technique employed.